Author: VD

China Puts Troops on the Ground

China appears to be warning NATO not to attack Belarus. Global Times reports Chinese troops have arrived in Belarus, on the border of Ukraine:

According to a press release from the Belarusian Defense Ministry on Saturday, military personnel from the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) have arrived in Belarus to participate in the joint anti-terrorism exercise scheduled from July 8 to 19.

The joint exercise will allow for the exchange of experience, the coordination of Belarusian and Chinese units, and the establishment of a foundation for further development of Belarusian-Chinese relations in the field of joint military training, said the Belarusian press release.

Photos released by the Belarusian Defense Ministry show the PLA troops arriving in Belarus on a Y-20 strategic transport aircraft of the PLA Air Force.

The joint drill was announced after Belarus officially jointed the SCO on Thursday, becoming its 10th member state, the Xinhua News Agency reported on the day.

This move is obviously being made in response to the buildup of NATO forces near the borders of Belarus. It’s apparent that Clown World is finding it difficult to accept the reality of its defeat in Ukraine, and is threatening to double down on its losing bet by openly sending in NATO forces.

By clarifying its pro-Russian position, China is calling what any sane observer would assume to be a bluff, although it is entirely possible that the Clown Worlders are desperate enough, and insane enough, to launch an attack on Belarus while claiming that it is not an attack on Russia.

DISCUSS ON SG

Wallowing in Pseudo-Madness

The Wasp Factory vs One Bright Star to Guide Them

Phil Sandifer debated Vox Day about two very different works of fiction by two very different authors on June 11, 2015. Since the interview is no longer available the now-defunct original site, I’ve posted the archived version here.

Below is a transcript of my interview with Vox Day, which you can listen to over at Pex Lives. I’ve lightly edited it to remove infelicities of language on both Day’s part and my own. I’ve also added a couple of footnotes clarifying aspects of the discussion. I am sure that Day would offer several clarifications of his own. Thanks again to Kevin and James for hosting this, and to Max Braden for preparing the transcript.

Phil Sandifer: Hi, I’m Phil Sandifer and I’ve got with me today the man at the center of the whole Hugo Awards controversy, Vox Day. Hello, Vox.

Vox Day: Hey, Phil. How are you?

Sandifer: I’m doing all right. So, the idea behind this interview is that Vox and I mutually agreed upon two works, one that he thinks is a great story and that I think is terrible, and one vice versa. The first is going to be John C. Wright’s One Bright Star to Guide Them, which is one of Vox’s Rabid Puppies, it’s up for a best novella Hugo this year, and the other is going to be the late great Iain Banks’s 1984 debut novel The Wasp Factory. We’re going to start with One Bright Star to Guide Them, by John C. Wright, who you’ve called a contender for the greatest living science fiction writer. The book’s promotional text describes it like so:

As children, long ago, Tommy Robertson and his three friends, Penny, Sally, and Richard, passed through a secret gate in a ruined garden and found themselves in an elfin land, where they aided a brave prince against the evil forces of the Winter King. Decades later, successful, stout, and settled in his ways, Tommy is long parted from his childhood friends, and their magical adventures are but a half-buried memory.

But on the very eve of his promotion to London, a silver key and a coal-black cat appear from the past, and Tommy finds himself summoned to serve as England’s champion against the invincible Knight of Ghosts and Shadows. The terror and wonder of Faerie has broken into the Green and Pleasant Land, and he alone has been given the eyes to see it, to gather his companions and their relics is his quest. But age and time have changed them too. Like Tommy, they are more worldly-wise, and more fearful. And evil things from childhood stories grow older and darker and more frightening with the passing of the years.

One Bright Star to Guide Them begins where other fairy tales end. Brilliant and bittersweet, the novella hearkens back to the greatest and best-loved classics of childhood fantasy. John C. Wright’s beautiful fairy tale is not a subversion of these classics, but a loving and nostalgic homage to them, and reminds the reader that although Ever After may not always be happy, the road of life goes ever on and evil must be defeated anew by each and every generation.”

Now, this is obviously the one of the two books that I think is awful, but I do want to say before we start, I really do love the premise. I really love the idea of going back to a sort of Narnia-esque children’s fiction world from the perspective of adulthood. There’s obviously a lot of stories in the “return to a children’s story in adulthood” style – I should point out for listeners who are coming to this through my work that the first two chapters are actually almost beat for beat the first two stories of Alan Moore’s Marvelman in terms of the plot – but I really can’t think of one in this sub-genre that’s played with Narnia in particular. There’s a very short story by Neil Gaiman called “The Problem of Susan,” but that’s about it. So I do want to admit up front, I do love the premise if nothing else. But you obviously love a lot more than just the premise here, so my first question is simple, Vox: why is this story great?

Day: Well, before I explain why I think it’s a great story, I think that it’s probably important for the purpose of full disclosure to point out that, number one, I was the editor who was responsible for publishing this story, and also I wrote that particular description that you just read.

Sandifer: Okay.

Day: So, it’s fair to point out that I am absolutely, utterly and completely biased in this regard, less because I have a pecuniary interest in the novella selling well – anyone who knows anything about publishing realizes that novellas are not the way that you make a lot of money in the publishing business – but I am very, very biased towards John Wright in particular as a writer, and One Bright Star to Guide Them is one of my three favorite things that he’s ever written. So I think very highly of him as a writer; the other writers that I think very highly of in the science fiction field are China Miéville and, until his most recent novel, Neal Stephenson.[1]

Now, what is particularly great about Wright, and something that a lot of people don’t necessarily realize, is that he’s not a writer who puts a lot of what I would call “craft” into it, by which I mean we’re not dealing with works that are written and re-written and re-written and re-written, for the most part. Now, in this particular case, he did write it as a short story, and then turned it into a novella later, but in general, what you see is what you get. It’s actually somewhat depressing to edit the man, because the stuff that he turns in just having dashed it off is much better than most of the stuff you see from other people.

Now, in the case of One Bright Star, like you said, the premise is fantastic. The idea that you’re beginning with these children who have been through this wonderful, incredible, fantastic experience, and then suddenly visiting, catching up with them thirty-some years later, is original in itself.

Sandifer: Right, I mean, there is, as I said, a large sub-genre of this. It’s hardly the only story, I think even from last year – I know a lot of people have compared it to Neil Gaiman’s The Ocean at the End of the Lane, which came out around the same time. [2]

Day: Sure, but there’s… You know, I’ve read The Ocean at the End of the Lane, it’s good, but what’s different about One Bright Star to Guide Them is that it is much more clearly written as an homage, not just to Narnia, but there’s actually elements of a great deal of other children’s fantasies that are much beloved.

Sandifer: Right, there’s a line that very closely hues to Susan Cooper’s The Dark is Rising that I noticed, for instance.

Day: Right. There’s also a fair amount of The Chronicles of Prydain. A lot of the fictional events that are referred to are much more out of Prydain than out of either The Dark is Rising or Narnia. And then there’s also a couple other ones, references to less well-known works. There’s certainly a call-out to George McDonald in there, the original fantasy writer, and so there’s a fair amount of depth there for those of us who were into that type of literature.

Sandifer: I think one of the reasons, though, people go for Narnia in particular – because, I mean, if you look at the reviews on Amazon, Narnia does seem to be the one that everyone goes to first when talking about the sort of influences on this, and I’m going to hazard a guess, no small part of that is because both Narnia and this are pretty explicitly Christian allegories. Do you think that’s a fair statement to say about this book?

Day: Absolutely, absolutely. And I think that that’s both part of why One Bright Star to Guide Them generates such powerful reactions in people who love it and in the much smaller number of people who dislike it, because I think in many cases, people’s reactions are being colored by their own personal feelings about Christianity, both for better and for worse.

DISCUSS ON SG

Continue reading “Wallowing in Pseudo-Madness”

Freakshow Cubed

The Guardian is desperately, and rather quixotically, attempting to maintain Mr. Tubcuddle’s public viability by putting him front and center of its praise for the very worst book I have ever read in its entirety. Because while I’m confident that Samuel L. Delaney’s Hogg and the Marquis de Sade’s 120 Days of Sodom are even worse, I’ve declined the opportunity to wallow in the wicked filth of those literary abominations. I was not so fortunate with regards to The Wasp Factory, which was published 40 years ago, although the world would be a better, brighter, more beautiful place if it had not been.

It was 1984, and the publisher Macmillan was holding a small event for booksellers, and had invited a tiny handful of journalists along as well. They would be announcing upcoming titles, trying to get the booksellers excited about them. I was one of the journalists, but I only remember one author and one book from that afternoon. The author’s editor, James Hale, was thrilled about a first novel, which Macmillan would soon be publishing, and which James had discovered on the “slush pile” of unsolicited manuscripts. The author had been asked to say a few words to the assembled booksellers about himself and his book.

The author had dark, curly auburn hair and a ginger beard that was barely more than ambitious stubble. He was tall, and his accent was Scottish. He told us that he had really wanted to be a science fiction writer, that he had written several science fiction books and sent them out to publishers without attracting any interest. Then he had decided to “write what he knew”. He had taken his own obsessions as a young man, his delight in blowing things up and his fascination with homemade implements of destruction, and he had given them to Frank, a young man who also liked blowing things up but went much further than the author ever had. The author was Iain Banks, of course, and the book was The Wasp Factory.

The story, he told us, began when Frank’s brother, Eric, escaped from a high-security psychiatric hospital, and let Frank know he was coming home. But, Iain warned us, that wasn’t what the story was about. 

What The Wasp Factory is about concerns an idiotic plot that wallows in nearly every form of depravity with a protagonist so retarded that he doesn’t realize he’s not a girl, he’s a boy who had his genitalia gnawed off by a dog. And this isn’t even the most disgusting aspect of the novel; the titular metaphor is even worse.

Because Iain Banks is not a terrible writer, the sheer awfulness of the book is even worse than it might otherwise have been. And it serves very well as a litmus test for the fundamental wrongness of those who admire it; besides Mr. Tubcuddle, the gentleman with whom I debated the merits and demerits of the book has now gone the way of the book’s protagonist, and, incidentally, deleted the transcript of our debate, which fortunately can still be heard via MP3.

An excerpt from the debate:

Day: And this also touches on my third point, which is: this is an idiot plot. I mean, this is what Roger Ebert described as – you know, he said that “the idiot plot is any plot that would be resolved in five minutes if everyone in the story were not an idiot.” So, you’ve got somebody who literally has never looked in her pants to discover that she’s got a vagina, you’ve got the father who is beyond idiocy with the whole story about the dog and the creation of the fake genitals just in case she ever asks, and then of course you’ve got Eric, who apparently never figured out that his sister was actually his sister either. I mean, this is an idiot plot. There’s no way around that.

Sandifer: This is grotesque, it’s a grotesquery. I think that the ludicrousness of it is a joke in the same spirit as “killing three people was just a phase I was going through.” I don’t think it’s an idiot plot so much as it is a parody of rural grotesquery that is deliberately at the absolute limits of what is even remotely plausible.

Day: I personally think it’s well beyond those limits, and, you know, I’m not saying that there’s no humor to it, but, you know, I didn’t find it funny, for the most part. The occasional one-offs, like you mention, you know, those were mildly amusing, but just to wallow in that depth of depravity and violence and murder, you know, it’s literally disgusting, and I didn’t find it funny, I didn’t find it edifying. Like I said, the plot is a literal idiot plot. Whether you want to say it’s because it was parody or not, it’s still an idiot plot. I’m not one of those people who finds… What’s that show, the guy from The Office…

Sandifer: U.S. or U.K.?

Day: Ricky Gervais.

Sandifer: Yes.

Day: He has that television show where he pretends to be retarded or something, and every ad he’s gurning, you know what I mean? It’s a relatively new show. I don’t find that funny either. And so, maybe the fact that it’s got an idiot plot but it’s a parody, therefore it’s supposed to make it intelligent, but to me, the plot is still what the plot is, and so I found it very, very disappointing, because the whole plot is totally dependent on the three major characters being and behaving like complete idiots.

And the problem I have when you talk about the whole psychosocial aspect of Frank is Banks, in my opinion, gets the characters completely wrong. Frank is not convincing in any way, shape, or form as a girl who believes she’s a boy, and that sort of thing. I’m pretty sure that Iain Banks never had any daughters, because if you’re a parent, and you’ve got both boys and girls, there is not a chance in hell that a little girl, even if you raise her as a boy, is going to behave like a boy.  This is where I think it goes beyond parody and is a level of absurd that is not credible. I would have found it much more credible if Frank had some female attributes and characteristics in his thinking that he couldn’t explain. But instead, like you said, he’s more of a parody of a hyper-male, and that to me makes no sense whatsoever.

UPDATE: Its not your imagination. There is literally a media conspiracy of silence regarding Neal Gaiman’s behavior toward women.

Speaking with our contacts in the comic industry, Fandom Pulse was told by an insider that there is a concerted media effort to squash this story. There are allegedly marching orders not to report on this, which makes the situation even more bizarre. Online comic forums and Facebook groups controlled by mainstream media forces shut down discussions to keep this story from getting out. If these orders are confirmed, the entertainment media corruption is on full display beyond anything we’ve ever seen. 

DISCUSS ON SG

Why BRICS Can’t Replace the G7

The new organizations will not be carbon copies of their Clown World predecessors:

We can state with certainty that groups such as the BRICS and, at the regional level, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, cannot replicate the model that has made the Western world so successful. Firstly, the objectives of its members are not to exploit the rest of humanity. Consequently, the level of coordination of national policies also cannot reach such a high degree. Simply because, by participating in BRICS, for instance, countries do not address the most fundamental issues of survival or achieve development objectives. In other words, everything the West creates is aimed against the rest of the world, and there are no exceptions. Those who now oppose the West, whether through confrontation like Russia or through the pursuit of softer alternatives like India and the Arab countries, do not initially orient their policies towards combating all humanity. Therefore, they will find it difficult to create an alternative form of institutional cooperation.

Second, the organizational structure of new alliances of countries from the Global South cannot be based on a ‘single leader’ model. Thus, large countries such as Russia, China, and even India have not joined the Western bloc because, due to their structural differences, they cannot accept the unquestioned authority of another major power to fulfil all of its demands, as Western Europe does with the United States.

Now the Global South is seeking to establish its own institutions but, for objective reasons, it still has a long way to go in understanding how these institutions can function without being replicas of Western models. This applies even to more specific areas of cooperation, which are strictly regulated within the West in accordance with internal power hierarchies.

However, the theoretical aspect of the issue is equally interesting. In this regard, even the very concept of “international order” may prove to be controversial and even unacceptable in some respects in the future.

The fact is that the entire conceptual framework which allows us to discuss international politics in a relatively consistent manner, was developed under specific conditions that were inherent in world events over the past five hundred years. This implies that we cannot currently determine how relevant well-known concepts of international reality will be in the coming decades.

For instance, the “Westphalian order” is a concept that emerged as a result of the legal resolution of an intra-European conflict between the mid-sixteenth and mid-seventeenth centuries, with little relevance to the rest of the world. However, due to the dominance of Western powers, this order — as a mechanism for interstate relations — has since spread across the globe.

In essence, the current system has been imposed on other countries. A notable example is China, which became “connected” to the Westphalian system through the military aggression of European powers in the early 19th century. This could lead to a situation where the words used by political leaders and scholars become meaningless.

This is another good sign that the most powerful of the sovereign nations, China and Russia, harbor no objective to replace the USA. But we already knew this; if China wanted to replace the USA, it would not have cancelled the planned “jump to China” in 2015 that was intended to accomplish precisely that.

DISCUSS ON SG

Vote for Peace

They give you war and call it democracy.

London’s support for Kiev during the conflict with Moscow will remain at the same level under his leadership, the new Prime Minister of Britain Keir Starmer has told Vladimir Zelensky. Starmer replaced Rishi Sunak as the head of the UK government on Friday after the Labour Party he leads claimed a landslide victory in a general election, securing at least 412 of the 650 seats in parliament. One of his first phone calls in the new role was with Zelensky.

DISCUSS ON SG

DOA in Wales

The Conservative Party no longer exists in Wales:

The UK Labour Party has won all but five of Wales’ 32 seats in the House of Commons after the Conservatives suffered a crushing defeat in Thursday’s general election. Labour secured 27 of the Welsh seats, while the pro-independence Plaid Cymru party won four and the Lib Dems took one. The Conservative Party faced a total wipeout, losing all 14 of the seats they had won in the 2019 election.

It appears that the English people will also require a different party to represent them, as apparently getting wiped out with a Hindu at its head wasn’t enough for the Conservatives, who are now apparently debating which African they should get behind as a leader.

It’s remarkable that the Tories still think they’re playing a game of ideology and inclusivity. That game is over, because Britain is no longer racially homogenous.

Four Episodes of Mr. Tubcuddle, Scientologist

Even Neil Gaiman’s biggest fans think his self-defense is inadequate and troublesome after listening to all four episodes of the Tortoise revelations about him.

After Listening to all four episodes: the facts themselves are bad

Let’s take a step back and assume, for the sake of argument, that literally everything that the women are saying is false, and that Gaiman’s version of events is closer to the truth. It is as exonerating as it can possibly be.

Gaiman still has a history of exploiting younger, inexperienced women who are either starstruck by him, or dependent on him, causing an absolutely massive power imbalance. He does this despite being married in an open relationship, and seems unwilling to be clear that he cannot commit to them.

This is if he is being entirely honest. At one point in the podcast to exonerate himself, he sends an email of K saying that she can’t wait to visit, her “loins are desperate” (not exactly it, but close) that’s from 2017, way after their relationship ended. When the journalists dug deeper they found that it was part of an email chain where he told her he was working with David Tennant, who she had a crush on, and her jokey “horniness” is clearly in reaction to Tennant. This shows that he is absolutely willing to mislead or to misrepresent evidence when it comes to this.

While there is no direct evidence of assault in Scarlett’s story, there’s a lot of smoke. Gaiman being accused of assault by Scarlett’s friends is indisputably something that happened. As is her saying that what happened “pushed boundaries” at the time.

If you insist that the benchmark needs to be: overt rape or bust, then sure, the evidence is probably insufficient. Even the podcast seems to walk it back to “sexual abuse” the vast majority of the time. But…sexual abuse is pretty bad. There is a very wide spectrum of treating women in a shitty way before you get to outright sexual assault.

I say this as a Gaiman fanatic. As someone who is irrevocably influenced by his work. I listened to all four of these episodes because I care deeply, and what we know for certain really sucks.

Here’s the main thing that the hapless defenders of the Scientologist Neil Gaiman are forgetting to take into account: where there’s an amount of smoke, there is usually fire.

There are two distinct accusers now. The a) combination of those accusations with b) Mr. Tubcuddle’s own body of work incorporating various forms of sexual abuse, sexual violence, and sexual assault, and c) Mr. Tubcuddle’s obviously suspect judgment, and d) the general degeneracy in the world of science fiction fandom, means that there will almost certainly be more accusers, more evidence, and more conclusively damning evidence forthcoming.

Here is one fan’s summary:

According to his recounting of events, in the early 2000s he met an 18 year old girl and was overly friendly to her. Then 2 years later he started dating her while married & kept her existance secret, made her so upset she followed him onto an aeroplane and he had her forcibly removed. Then in response he tried to make it seem like she was thirsting after him years later when she was thirsting after David Tennant. (Aren’t we all.)

Then, in 2022, he met his son’s 21 year old Nanny who came to stay with them during a pandemic. The first time he ever met her, he got fully naked and asked to have a bath with her, then “kissed and cuddled.”

Then continued to have an ongoing BDSM & sexual relationship with someone 1/3 of his age while he was her employer.

She spoke to her friends at the time and called it abuse, her friend confronted Neil’s wife Amanda Palmer, and then she responded by saying it’s a “very bad situation” (not defending him) and breaking up with him.

Then when Scarlett spoke out about what happened he said he was suicidal and manipulated her into comforting him, and in doing so got her to say it was “eventually” consensual. IN RESPONSE TO HIM SAYING HE WAS SUICIDAL.

And then he said she has a false memory disorder when she doesn’t.

It’s readily observable from his version of events that Gaiman has been deeply and profoundly dishonest about both situations. He not only misrepresented the evidence of the context of the first woman’s emails after the fact, but sent the second woman “an NDA backdated to the day they met (when some very questionable behavior on his part occurred) as a condition for giving her six months rent money after the relationship had ended.” And he extorted a statement about consensuality from the latter with threats of suicide.

Furthermore, since Gaiman is a Scientologist, we know the Church of Scientology has a comprehensive record of his past misdeeds, at least up to the point that he claims to have left the organization, which may or may not be true. If it’s true that he was a level 8 auditor, then he wasn’t just another ignorant Hollywood celebrity recruit. Given the way Scientology operates, they quite likely have maintained an updated file on him that continues to the present. Which means the damning information is likely out there and available; don’t be too shocked if he unexpectedly rejoins Scientology in the aftermath of his public unmasking as, at the very least, a predatory, manipulative, and sexually-inappropriate creep.

It’s worth noting that he’s already threatened to kill himself over this. Which tends to indicate that there is considerably more that will come out over time, and explains why the science fiction community is being so quiet about this instead of engaging in their usual full-throated man-the-barricades approach.

UPDATE: As usual, one can always trust the logic. His ex-wife, Amanda Palmer has reportedly been quoted as saying the second woman “was the 14th who had come to her about what Neil did.” I think we can officially put a fork in Neil Gaiman. Whether he goes to jail or not, he’s done.

UPDATE: Gaiman’s father was the head of public relations for Scientology in the UK and Gaiman was actually kicked out of an Anglican school due to being a Scientologist. No wonder his work is so avowedly, and so nonsensically, anti-Christian.

DISCUSS ON SG

A Note About Neil

John Scalzi finally addresses the accusations of sexual assault against Scientologist Neil Gaiman. Sort of.

I learned about the sexual assault allegations involving Neil Gaiman at the same time as everybody else. I don’t know any more about it than anyone else. Everything I have read about it to this point makes me angry and unhappy and sad.

I understand there are people who want a different public statement from me about this than Gaaaah what the actual fuck. Maybe those people are better at processing bad news involving a friend.

Deep. Meaningful. Insightful. And, as we expected, totally devoid of any criticism or disavowal of Mr. Tubcuddle’s admitted actions.

And still not a peep out of File770 or Tor.com aka Reactor.

DISCUSS ON SG

Kicked Out of the Fake Church

Fake Pope Francis has excommunicated Archbishop Viganò from the hollow shell of what used to be the Roman Catholic Church:

Italian Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, the disgraced former papal nuncio to the United States who questioned the legitimacy of Pope Francis and the authority of the Second Vatican Council, has been found guilty of schism and excommunicated, the Vatican announced on July 5.

“His public statements manifesting his refusal to recognize and submit to the Supreme Pontiff, his rejection of communion with the members of the Church subject to him, and of the legitimacy and magisterial authority of the Second Vatican Council are well known,” stated a Vatican bulletin that announced the ruling.

It’s just as well. What fellowship can light have with darkness?

I, too, question the legitimacy of Pope Frances and the authority of the Second Vatican Council.

DISCUSS ON SG